Christian News By Christians, For Christians.

Orthodox Prebyterian Church Logo

Michael Spangler’s Unjust Divestiture from the OPC

Every denomination has its Ryan Turnipseed, a pariah that the elites within the denomination seek to punish for politically incorrect wrongspeak. Within the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Michael Spangler is that pariah who was divested from ministry over a “lack of giftedness.” This is not a formal act of church discipline or excommunication, but simply a derecognition of his ministerial credentials, meaning they are viewing him as unqualified to teach. From a polity standpoint, it does not require a sin to be divested from ministry.

Charges from the OPC

The charges against Spangler can be seen in this letter from the OPC, dated September 4, 2023. The first charge is that Spangler was not above reproach in which they cite his history of being suspended from ministry (without detail). They claim that he was pivotal in the “demise of Providence OPC.”

Using 1 Timothy 3:3, the second charge contends that he is not gentle, but quarrelsome. The first piece of evidence presented is a sermon on Psalm 139 entitled “Perfect Hatred” which was given in October of 2020.

For context, Psalm 139: 19-22 NKJV reads:

Oh, that You would slay the wicked, O God! Depart from me, therefore, you bloodthirsty men. For they speak against You wickedly; Your enemies take Your name in vain. Do I not hate them, O Lord, who hate You? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You? I hate them with perfect hatred; I count them my enemies.

The sermon was about biblical hatred, something that has been gaining steam recently from the likes of Joel Webbon. While the letter contends their offense with multiple statements in the sermon, they quote this statement by Spangler as most problematic:

Because, my friends, if you refuse to hate God’s enemies, you’re refusing to love God. And so, I leave you with a warning, and I plead that you will hear it. If this is so, that you refuse to love God by hating His enemies, then in fact and to the extent you do so, you hate God. And He hates you. And so does David. He says it in our text. And so does Christ his greater Son.

The concept of biblical hatred is a complicated realm, but it does exist, and how does one confront this passage without addressing David’s professed hatred as God’s enemies as righteous? This relates to the practice of imprecatory psalms or prayers, something many are loath to touch.

Spangler is further labeled as quarrelsome in his criticism of Rosaria Butterfield in which he tweeted, “Mrs. Butterfield repents of ‘a carry-over from my gay activist days.’ Praise God. Now the church should repent of platforming women teachers, and of too quickly trusting former sexual deviants.” This was April of 2023 after she had just repented of this sin. It was perfectly reasonable at the time to warn against quickly trusting or platforming those who switch sides on an issue. The Conservative movement is riddled with platformed liberals who contend that “the Left left them.”

Spangler remains critical of Butterfield even to this day, believing that the platforming of women like Butterfield or Basham is subversive and would be frowned upon by those before 1900. One can disagree with this position without claiming that it is sinful or disqualifying for ministry.

The third charge is that of arrogance, in which their evidence consists of his statements against women and feminism. The original Facebook post is inaccessible.

Spangler_effeminacy

Apparently, confronting feminism in the culture substantiates the charge of arrogance. While historically recognized, the sin of effeminacy in 1 Corinthians 6:9 is seldom discussed regarding this passage, especially since many translations fail to include the word in the passage. There is a claim of his refusal to recognize the aforementioned discipline, which in part is a reference to Spangler being censured for calling Aimee Byrd a wolf. The bookend evidence the Shepherding Committee presents is from an article written in May of 2020, where it cherry-picks this passage:

Too many men’s ministries are ruined by a discontent wife, too many men’s sermons are emasculated by a nagging household critic. Ask yourself, have you, or would you, preach against the angry and contentious woman (Prov. 21:19)? Have you, or would you, discipline a female member for disrespecting her appointed head (Eph. 5:23)? If not, why not? Is it because you could not return home and face the woman in your own house? Or the man in your own mirror?

In its entirety, the article condemns both men and women in confronting feminism while opening with praise for those who have taken up this fight, which at the time included Shane Anderson (OPC), Doug Wilson, John MacArthur (for his “go home” comment), and surprisingly John Piper. Much has been said about the inability of the church to condemn women or how “the church is not for men.” There is nothing remotely controversial about the article other than that it is a redress of feminism both in society and in the church. Moreover, asking the question of whether a church would discipline a malcontent or disobedient wife is apparently evidence of arrogance to the OPC.

Of the fourth charge, it could be summed up as making negative statements about the Jews. Following Ron DeSantis’s antisemitism bill, which was a precursor to the current bill in Congress and was signed in Israel, he tweeted, “Christian, don’t be mistaken on this: Jews are your enemies.” Essentially, he is being called unwise and injurious to the church for noticing what has been noticed throughout Church history.

Spangler’s Speech

Michael Spangler gave a speech before the Shepherding Committee on April 4, 2024 in which he defended himself. The modified speech can be retrieved here. Of his defense of the fourth charge, he stated the following:

Second, that which seemed to have the greatest weight in the September letter, and also was treated at length in the committee report, is my post last April post regarding the Jews. It should surprise no one to say that Jews are singled out in the New Testament as a great public enemy of the church. Consider Peter’s sermon in Acts 2, in the conclusion of which he aims a purposefully sharpened spear into the hearts of his Jewish hearers, a spear which pierced three thousand of them to the heart

Spangler’s contention is that while Jews are portrayed as the adversary throughout the New Testament, the question would be whether they are still the enemy.

The only question remaining is whether that hardened enmity persists today. Consider on this question the apostle Paul, who speaks generically without time restraint of Jewish evil in 1 Thessalonians 2:14–16

He proceeds to cite John Chrysostom, John Calvin, and Gisbertus Voetius to substantiate that “For the vast majority of Jews today, the veil remains over their eyes.”

Like Turnipseed, another claim against Spangler was his association with Corey Mahler of Stone Choir. The OPC committee’s interest or “greatest trouble” in this is identical to the LCMS, though Spangler’s interactions are less than that of Turnipseed’s. Spangler summarizes the scandal of the LCMS in the speech, which he credits Mahler for exposing.

Old Path’s Podcast

Spangler is a co-host of the Old Path’s Podcast and gave a 2-hour interview in which he discussed in detail the divestiture process and his experience. Amongst the claims, he calls out Carl Truman for platforming feminists like Aimee Byrd. Truman is OPC and was not censured for platforming Byrd. It should be noted that Byrd was booted from the Mortification of Sin podcast following the release of her book Recovering from Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.

They also express fear that the process of divestiture will be weaponized against pastors and teachers in the future, in which those who speak out against prevailing issues will be condemned for stirring dissension.

What this effectively means is that OPC Presbyteries may now remove men from office without judicial process. They’ve weaponized divestiture for a lack of requisite gifts…But as we’ve already argued and tried to show plainly, that’s not really what this is about. This is much deeper and it is a problem. And by the standard, I fear, I fear for my brethren, they still have ministerial credentials that they could be taken from them at any, at any time…I actually think knowing the heart of man and seeing how things in the church, I think something worse is a consequence. What’s worse is that those young men won’t cross the line now is that they actually won’t get in trouble, and they won’t be divested because they’ve heard the message loud and clear.

Overall, Spangler thinks that the pastorate will become more cautious and reticent to speak as a result of his divestiture.

Conclusions

Michael Spangler is the Ryan Turnipseed of the OPC. While the OPC General Assembly meets on June 19-25th and might consider his appeal, it is unlikely to prove successful since the platform is against him. It also would not overturn his administrative divestiture, as only the merits of the complaint can be appealed to the GA, not the administrative decision.

Of the two issues Spangler spoke against, that of feminism and the Jews, both are the most sensitive subjects for anyone to speak against. Spangler is correct in calling out Third-Wayist like Carl Truman for platforming feminists like Byrd. He is correct in his critique of the effeminacy in the church that still to this day too few condemn. And if the “enmity of the Jews” is still present to this day, as Spangler contends, it would be imperative to warn against “sins [that] are particularly commensurately to them” in hopes that they might repent and be saved.

And perhaps the last major grievance is that of managerialism removing pastors administratively without the consent of the church. The right of the OPC to litigate a “lack of giftedness” over an already ordained pastor, in which his gifts would have been previously validated, is antithetical to Scripture, wherein removal of a pastor should be made following a reproach of sin or false doctrine as stated by at least two witnesses (1 Timothy 5:19). One should not be removed simply because some people think he is too (based) mean. Unfortunately, it is often the first ones sounding the alarms who get burned at the stake.

Support the Evangelical Dark Web

By becoming a member of Evangelical Dark Web, you get access to more content, help drive the direction of our research, and support the operations of the ministry.
Facebook
Twitter
Telegram
Reddit
LinkedIn

5 Responses

  1. Everything in the West is going to have to collapse as there’s a post-ww2 liberalized/feminized worldview problem that needs to play itself out to its logical collapse.

    Speak like a Christian from 50AD-1930AD and you are now called divisive and possibly a heretic. Hard to imagine anything could ever be fixed without a Christian monarchy; it’s what the Protestant colonialists should have formed in the first place, not a Roman Republic larp.

  2. I have heard Spangler’s sermon on God’s Perfect Hatred cited as the reason (by OPC men) to distance from Michael Spangler. Unfortunately for his detractors, that sermon was what turned me from my distrust of Michael (and opinion that he was foolishly wasting his ministry on his petty quarrel with Byrd) to become a great supporter of his qualifications as a preacher. I urge everyone to go to sermon audio and judge for yourselves. I pray that the Lord humble him and bless him with an offer to enter ministry in another denomination. He has found a home in the FCC, if I am not mistaken. I pray he flourish there and remain very much a critic not of Christ’s Church, but of the evils assailing her.

  3. Mr. Spangler’s divestiture was primarily due to obstinance and lack of humility, in my view having known him for the past 10 years and been at all meetings of the trial. He changed radically after seminary, both in his views and personality. He did great harm to his closest friends and mentors. He torpedoed a church almost singlehandedly. He is able to gain sympathy by speaking in a measured, quiet manner, but he is becoming increasingly radical and brings shame to the church. Sympathy is misplaced.

  4. Lucas, your concern is understandable. However, the sermon’s content was not what presbytery was exactly alarmed by (other than the “I hate you” comment). Many presbyters spoke during deliberations about the true/Biblical aspects of the sermon. Most of it was acceptable other than a few sentences. The problem was not in the biblical language or difficulty of the topic. Rather, it was the lack of clarity (what was not said) to the point that it opens the door wide for misinterpretation. It is a problem of presenting only the controversial side of a picture rather than the fullness of what we have been given in Scripture. When pressed, he refuses to clarify. He speaks in a manner calculated to cause controversy. Rather than bringing clarity and wisdom to difficult issues, he stirs the pot and gets people arguing. He has done this so frequently that it almost seems as though he is pursuing personal attention rather than biblical truth. Other men in that same presbytery have written articles and spoken on the same subjects as Michael, and they had no difficulty in that presbytery. If people disagree with how he was divested, that is understandable. It is very difficult to argue that he still ought to be trusted in ministry at this point.

  5. People like Spangler are a nut case and an embarassment to the church. I wish he was disciplined in every sense as we can see, the dog is still barking and needs to be put down once for good.

Leave a Reply

Join 8,116 other subscribers

Receive the Evangelical Dark Web Newsletter

Bypass Big Tech censorship, and get Christian news in your inbox directly.

Trending Posts